March is the warmest March on land ever recorded

[Bobby]

Global temperatures have sharply rebounded in record breaking fashion after a short cooler period. For land, it is the warmest March ever recorded. Globally, land and sea, it was the second warmest March ever.

I think this highlights that we need to use long term data, not short term.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/2...marchstats.html

Edited April 21, 2008 by Paul
Removed un-needed comments... READ THE CODE OF CONDUCT

[Essan]

It does indeed

The fact we have a cold month (or a hot month) proves nothing when we're looking at long term climatic trends.

Of course, it's obvious that the March figures have been doctored - although those for January must have been correct B)

[Gray-Wolf]

If the current levels of warming can override the natural conflagration of 'cool' natural cycles that we are in the middle of then we would appear to be in far worse shape than many care to believe.

Sadly that savage kind of renewed heating may well prove to be the only the kind of confirmation of mans impacts on the planet that some of the doubters will accept.........and now of course it's far too late to remedy our errors in any meaningful kind of way.

The main worry must be that another warm Northern hemisphere summer will cause the final breakdown of the remaining multiyear pack.

Ho Hum.....

[West is Best]

Global temperatures have sharply rebounded in record breaking fashion after a short cooler period. For land, it is the warmest March ever recorded. Globally, land and sea, it was the second warmest March ever.

I think this highlights that we need to use long term data, not short term.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/2...marchstats.html

I certainly agree with your final remark. However, there are some points I would like to disagree with:

1. Global temperatures were not record-breaking. Global land tempeatures were (as you later mention, and in your title). Your inter-changing of the two terms is a little disconcerting!

2. Sea temperatures were not record-breaking. The sea makes up 2/3rds of the earth's surface

3. 'It was the second warmest March ever'. No it wasn't. Land temperature measurements have only been taken since 1880 i.e. 128 years. Oceanographic temperatures have been recorded. We do not know about temperatures in the 'ever' range, and I don't consider 128 years to be a hugely long baseline, although it's not bad.

It will be interesting to see what happens as the year progresses. There is no doubt now that the earth has cooled over the past 12 months relative to the preceding years. For those who wish to see the NOAA measurements on the past 3 months for the global data, here's a neat pic of them:

Edited April 21, 2008 by Paul
Re-worded un-needed comments

[Roger J Smith]

Did you notice that the graph doesn't actually show March being record warm or even quite as warm as 2005?

Or is this land and oceans combined?

Anyway, I'm not that surprised with the rebound, the widespread cold in Jan and Feb was due mainly to snow cover being well extended beyond normal boundaries, especially in Asia. March probably was heavily influenced by much milder weather in Siberia where the arctic high had migrated south earlier then broken up.

North America remained quite cold, with record snow depths over a large segment of eastern Canada, some of which has recently melted very quickly, but some holding on for a later melt. In both cases, severe flooding either has occurred, or will shortly.

I don't expect the recent warming episode to fade quickly, if it does at all, because such trends require 3-7 years of persistent pattern change especially in the arctic. The "other lesson" of the winter of 2007-08, I think, is that natural feedback processes could overwhelm whatever has been going on, natural and or AGW warming. The open water anomaly in the Arctic Ocean in the autumn of 2007 is clearly linked to the development of persistent cold over parts of Asia and North America through some kind of enhanced snowfall mechanism. If this cycle continues and intensifies, who can say where the climate machine will go next? Perhaps it's time to dust off the old Simpson hypothesis (open Arctic Ocean leads to ice age start up conditions). Maybe that will prove to be a concern. But this is not easily subject to modelling, too many assumptions are built into these global long-range models, and too little hard science, in my humble opinion.

[Thundery wintry showers]

Synoptics can have significant short-term effects on the global temperature anomalies. For instance, if you have a lot of blocking over the continents, the result tends to be cold anomalies over the continents and warm anomalies over the oceans; similarly if the patterns bias towards southerlies over the oceans and northerlies over the continents.

Continents are more prone to greater anomalies than the oceans. This is why the +ve NAO Januarys of 2005 and 2007, with strong westerlies over the Northern Hemisphere, were the two warmest on record over the Northern Hemisphere, while the blocked January of 2006 had temperatures barely above the average.

So yes, it was unwise to point at January/February 2008 as evidence of cooling- just as it's unwise to point at March 2008 as evidence of a return to near-record warmth. The absolute anomaly at the moment will fall somewhere in between, you do need to take a longer-period average in these situations.

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Is it just me, or does 2008 not reach the record high, or even beat the 2005 figure?

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

If the current levels of warming can override the natural conflagration of 'cool' natural cycles that we are in the middle of then we would appear to be in far worse shape than many care to believe.

The only cycle we are in the middle of is the '11' year sunspot cycle currently at its minima. We are not in the middle of any other cool natural cycle and the 11 year cycle in the grand scheme is of little relevance.

Chris L yes Roger has brought that question up too. The question re is that graph land based or combined would be good to find out because it does not show the warmest March 'ever'. I suspect it is landbased too.

Roger, the Simpson theory...that's the one. Yes ice free arctic precedes the next ice age [allegedly hasn't failed to do so yet]

BFTP

[millennia]

Global temperatures have sharply rebounded in record breaking fashion after a short cooler period. For land, it is the warmest March ever recorded. Globally, land and sea, it was the second warmest March ever.

I think this highlights that we need to use long term data, not short term.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/2...marchstats.html

Just how accurate are land temperatures?

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/...tations-update/

I've no problem with SST being warm (or the 13th warmest to quote the NOAA) as we've been in a warming trend since the end of the 19th century and the heat inertia of the oceans is massive.

What do the satellites say?

[Gray-Wolf]

The only cycle we are in the middle of is the '11' year sunspot cycle currently at its minima. We are not in the middle of any other cool natural cycle and the 11 year cycle in the grand scheme is of little relevance.

BFTP

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80421195005.htm

Guess I'd better bin this then BFTP.......LOL.

Are we to see you 'U' turn over this as your position becomes increasingly untenable Blast? As far as the rest of the folk monitoring the globe are concerned the northern Hemispheric 'cooldown' period is in full swing yet still we have max temp records being set. Odd that eh?

[Admiral_Bobski]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80421195005.htm

Guess I'd better bin this then BFTP.......LOL.

Are we to see you 'U' turn over this as your position becomes increasingly untenable Blast? As far as the rest of the folk monitoring the globe are concerned the northern Hemispheric 'cooldown' period is in full swing yet still we have max temp records being set. Odd that eh?

I'm not sure where you get the impression that the cooldown period is "in full swing". In the article you link to it says:

This La Niña, which has persisted for the past year, is indicated by the blue area in the center of the image along the equator. Blue indicates lower than normal sea level (cold water). The data were gathered in early April.

The image also shows that this La Niña is occurring within the context of a larger climate event, the early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

"Early Stages" is not the same as "Full Swing".

As for the "maximum temperature records" you mention, temperatures have got to stall before they can fall. Temperatures have been going up, now they appear to be levelling off - yes, temperatures may start to climb again, but at this point it would be foolhardy to completely rule out the possibility of a cooldown, since one would expect temperatures to level off for a while as the cooling kicks in.

CB

[Devonian]

Just how accurate are land temperatures?

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/...tations-update/

My problem is: who knows more about measuring atmospheric temperatures, NOAA or Anthony Watts? Besides, if the surface stations are at fault, as Watts claims, why do the satellite records show the same trend as the surface?

I for one wouldn't have the cheek to go to the Met Office and start telling them how to do their job.

I've no problem with SST being warm (or the 13th warmest to quote the NOAA) as we've been in a warming trend since the end of the 19th century and the heat inertia of the oceans is massive.

What do the satellites say?

I think SST's move rather more quickly than the bulk of the oceans.

[millennia]

My problem is: who knows more about measuring atmospheric temperatures, NOAA or Anthony Watts? Besides, if the surface stations are at fault, as Watts claims, why do the satellite records show the same trend as the surface?

It is the NOAA that define the ratings for a station and Watts just takes the photographs and interprets those ratings. He has no actual evidence of the actual magnitude of the errors, I'm not sure that is the point of his excercise, but you have to admit there are a lot of very badly maintained and poor sited instruments out there and they form the base data for the climate models - that's got to be just a little bit scary, hasn't it?

Which satellites show the same trend as land surface records? Everything I've seen shows a near flat satellite record conflicting with the upward land surface measurement trend.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80421195005.htm

Guess I'd better bin this then BFTP.......LOL.

Are we to see you 'U' turn over this as your position becomes increasingly untenable Blast? As far as the rest of the folk monitoring the globe are concerned the northern Hemispheric 'cooldown' period is in full swing yet still we have max temp records being set. Odd that eh?

No U turn at all GW. In fact what you have posted supports what I have been saying. You must read posts and read stuff that you post GW because clearly you are not. Oh and we have many min temp records being broken too. You do post inaccurately GW and it is a trait that I have mentioned to you in the past.

So as your report says we are in the early part of the PDO cool phase [ indeed directly linked to the La Nina perturbation cycle which started in Feb 2007] and NOT in full swing. There is only one person in an untenable position....and it ain't moi.

BFTP

[laserguy]

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/...ill-in-the-air/

We're told what's what by the powers that be,but read the comments and real life observations after the main article.

[acbrixton]

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/...ill-in-the-air/

We're told what's what by the powers that be,but read the comments and real life observations after the main article.

Laserguy, thanks for posting that link. I thought the main article had the 'ring of truth' and intuitively made sense. The comments following were little more than Gore baiting, conflation of weather with climate, petty triumphalism and added little or nothing to any debate.

regards

ACB

p.s. do you also post on political matters under the name 'laserman'?

[Lettucing Gutted]

The main worry must be that another warm Northern hemisphere summer will cause the final breakdown of the remaining multiyear pack.

Ho Hum.....

Unfortunately I doubt many people except scientists and me would be worried since most people would be enjoying another "wonderful" warm summer.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Craig Evans

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

At a glance, still 6 days to go, I think April will not be following March. As someone said it is one month and as such is just an anomaly. April snow and ice cover seems to have remained steady, so let's see what figure comes in.

BFTP

[laserguy]

Laserguy, thanks for posting that link. I thought the main article had the 'ring of truth' and intuitively made sense. The comments following were little more than Gore baiting, conflation of weather with climate, petty triumphalism and added little or nothing to any debate.

regards

ACB

p.s. do you also post on political matters under the name 'laserman'?

Nope,sorry! The only forum I've ever contributed to is this one,and as laserguy! I see what you mean about the content of some of the comments,but I'm not totally surprised at folk taking the opportunity to have a pop at big Al and the whole AGW thing in general (I've even been known to indulge myself,on odd occasion!) as it starts to unravel.